Recently my son wrestled in a Jr High tournament and got demolished. We found out after the match that his opponent was intentionally held back and is repeating 8th grade related to sports. It seems like this would be illegal and it is definitely not safe. Is there in anything in the rules which states an age limit for Jr High wrestling?

OHSAA Bylaw 4-2-2
If a student enrolled in grade 7 or 8 attains the age of 15 before August 1, the student shall be
ineligible to participate in 7th & 8th grade interscholastic athletics for the school year commencing
in that calendar year.

OHSAA Bylaw 4-2-2
If a student enrolled in grade 7 or 8 attains the age of 15 before August 1, the student shall be
ineligible to participate in 7th & 8th grade interscholastic athletics for the school year commencing
in that calendar year.

So the age limit is he could not have turned 15 before August 1st.

Yep. And the new liberalized age rules enacted by the OHSAA will ensure there are more of these cases.

The 18 year old senior, wrestling for the school in the community he grew up in, is sadly becoming an endangered species.

OHSAA Bylaw 4-2-2
If a student enrolled in grade 7 or 8 attains the age of 15 before August 1, the student shall be
ineligible to participate in 7th & 8th grade interscholastic athletics for the school year commencing
in that calendar year.

That answered the age question but if he was held back in 8th grade then he cannot compete based on:

"Ohio bylaw 4-3-4: After a student completes the sixth grade and before the student enters the ninth grade, the student may be eligible for a period not to exceed four semesters taken in order of attendance,
whether the student participates or not."

So once he entered 7th grade he had 4 semesters and the 2nd time around in 8th grade one cannot compete in JH events.

There is another provision that allows a 15yr old 8th grader to compete at HS level sports but that impacts the semester count for ones Senior year.

So was the kid held back in 8th grade and ineligible or pre 7th grade and therefore eligible.

As I read my "Green Book" I come across an interesting paragraph on page 13. It states that a Ref should NEVER, #1 Make a hand gesture with fingers and thumb showing how close the back is to the mat.
#2 Make a hand signal with a hand straight up and down symbolizing a 90° angle.
#3 Wave hand back and forth (I assume this means when the back touches but not long enough to count near fall). The book says those signals are not approved NFHS hand signals AND are a form of COACHING.

Coaches and other Ref's what's your thoughts on this?

Personally, I can't see the "coaching" part. IF I'm signalling how close the defensive wrestler is to being pinned - both wrestlers have the opportunity to see that...Not just one - the defensive wrestler obviously knows he's close or I'd pinned him out, AND, throughout the Green Book it talks about communication with the coaches, audience (fans), and table...
My argument for #1 is, when the coaches and crowd are going nuts and booing we officials because we've not called the pin, by me showing the defensive wrestler pinning area is off the mat - EVERYONE in the gym knows what I'm seeing, thus keeping everyone in check.
#2 is, When the coach and fans are yelling "back points" or "that's backs" - If I'm signalling that the defensive wrestler has not made the 45° criteria with my hand - again it's informing EVERYONE what I'm seeing.
#3 argument is, When a defensive wrestler rocks to his back and then back out of near fall criteria before the two seconds are reached and I flip my hand over and back... EVERYONE knows what I am seeing or thinking...
What do you guys think? Should we Ref's be "allowed" to use these signals? I've done them for years and I absolutely know they do as I argue up above. Personally I didn't know we are forbidden to use them...
Thoughts? Is it "coaching" as claimed?

First, remember who wrote the Green Book? That should tell you something.

In order of your questions:

1) This was popular for a short time when I started officiating. Seems like a good idea until you have a situation where you are indicating there is X distance needed for the fall to occur. Then it does when your fingers are still apart. Logically, you are going to asked "what changed?" and you won't really have an answer. Why do you worry about what the crowd is yelling or their booing? If you haven't called the fall, it isn't there. As long as you have counted the earned NF points, you have done what you should do. Don't worry about "pleasing" the crowd.

2) As long as you haven't started counting, there is obviously no NF happening. Remember that you have the best view in the house. If you are close enough to see what you need to see, don't worry about the crowd. They have built in bias, you don't.

3) I don't have a big problem with this one but it really is not needed. The fact that you counted "1" and nothing more, then points have not been earned.
Contrary to the Green book, I would not consider this coaching in any form BUT these signals are not needed. Much like officials who flap their arms indicating "no control". In some case (especially with funk wrestling) this might be helpful so coaches and fans know you have not seen the control that THEY think they see. However, there is not reason to do it for an extended period of time.

1a) How exactly can the defensive man see your fingers showing he is an inch off the mat? Are you placing your fingers in front of his face?

1b) Coaches might be going crazy, but 99% of them know that if you haven't called a pin, that means he hasn't met the criteria. Fans will go nuts either way. They have a better view than you do and they know the criteria is that both shoulders must be held to the mat for a continuous 2 seconds for a fall to be reached. You showing them that, doesn't really do anything in all honesty. As a fan, I assume because you're wearing the stripes, uh... grays... that you know the rules better than I. Not all accept that as I have, but most of those fans have a "stake" in their wrestler and are bias.

#2 Once again, if you aren't counting back points by way of voice or approved arm motion, 99% of those coaches understand this and don't need that motion. Now... their view and thought of 45 and yours don't always align, but once again, they have a bias, you shouldn't.

#3 This unofficial signal, I have no issue with as a fan, but as a coach or wrestler, you're giving someone an advantage. I think it's only one sided as well. Sure, both coaches can see it most likely and try to instruct, but the wrestler that is close to securing near fall benefits the most. If he is in a precarious position, now he has a better idea how much more risk is needed to secure a near fall count. The guy on his back only knows to stay off his back.

All in all, I'd say all your mentioned signals are a form of coaching. You may think that it isn't because both coaches can see a signal, but in each instance, you're giving a distinct advantage to one of the wrestlers. To go with situation #1, would you tell the top man to move his arm from blocking a pin? You give that signal to me as a coach, and that's the first thing on my mind and now I know what to tell my wrestler to help secure a fall.

Lastly, if it is in the green book, which in part is an addendum to the NFHS rule book and mostly mechanics related, then that should be the accepted practice of ALL officials in Ohio. You doing your own thing is leaving the rest of your buddies out to dry. Have you thought about that? I'm willing to bet that if you ever get the opportunity to officiate at a state event, they'd tell you to knock that stuff off or don't come back. I believe one of the latest rule updates on the OWOA and OHSAA site said something about using only approved mechanics.

All in all, I'd say all your mentioned signals are a form of coaching. You may think that it isn't because both coaches can see a signal, but in each instance, you're giving a distinct advantage to one of the wrestlers. To go with situation #1, would you tell the top man to move his arm from blocking a pin? You give that signal to me as a coach, and that's the first thing on my mind and now I know what to tell my wrestler to help secure a fall.

They specifically will tell bottom/top man to "work/improve" which is coaching them. They lean in on a restart and tell guys to "attempt to score or someone is getting hit", which inevitably leads to a bad shot attempt soon after by someone. I have even heard officials say "Leg attacks gentleman" insinuating that attempting to score in other ways is somehow stalling. Coaching by officials happens often and can be pretty frustrating.

They specifically will tell bottom/top man to "work/improve" which is coaching them. They lean in on a restart and tell guys to "attempt to score or someone is getting hit", which inevitably leads to a bad shot attempt soon after by someone. I have even heard officials say "Leg attacks gentleman" insinuating that attempting to score in other ways is somehow stalling. Coaching by officials happens often and can be pretty frustrating.

Are they specifically saying... Bottom man improve? Are they getting that specific? Then yes, you're correct and that is bad practice. Just saying improve without telling a specific wrestler is not coaching a kid. The goal is to improve your position and work for a fall or an escape, takedown, whatever. The official is making sure both are aware. If that is said while a wrestler is hanging on to a foot from the advantage position, then it is obvious whom he is talking to and shouldn't be said in that situation.

Same with the attempt score. As long as he isn't saying... hey red... attempt to score. It's not coaching. He never said to take a crappy double. Just reminding both wrestlers of their obligation.

Leg attacks... That is the dumbest thing I've ever heard and if an official actually said that, then he needs to restart classes. That's terrible and I hope you had words with said official that involved another reputable official.

Are they specifically saying... Bottom man improve? Are they getting that specific? Then yes, you're correct and that is bad practice. Just saying improve without telling a specific wrestler is not coaching a kid. The goal is to improve your position and work for a fall or an escape, takedown, whatever. The official is making sure both are aware. If that is said while a wrestler is hanging on to a foot from the advantage position, then it is obvious whom he is talking to and shouldn't be said in that situation.

Same with the attempt score. As long as he isn't saying... hey red... attempt to score. It's not coaching. He never said to take a crappy double. Just reminding both wrestlers of their obligation.

Leg attacks... That is the dumbest thing I've ever heard and if an official actually said that, then he needs to restart classes. That's terrible and I hope you had words with said official that involved another reputable official.

The words " Improve top/bottom man" are said from time to time. Also the words improve get used in situations that it is obvious which one the ref is talking to.

"Attempt to score" is okay, "attempt to score or someone is getting hit" is not.

I agree with that. The idea is to get everyone on the same page. If this is an issue where a large amount of officials are doing it, then it should be addressed.

From those I talk to and what I personally see, Ohio is getting better at getting the officials as uniform as possible. Unfortunately, not everyone gets the message or wants to take to the message. It's very tough when a large amount of people do something and all have very different motivations and goals.

Lastly, if it is in the green book, which in part is an addendum to the NFHS rule book and mostly mechanics related, then that should be the accepted practice of ALL officials in Ohio. You doing your own thing is leaving the rest of your buddies out to dry. Have you thought about that? I'm willing to bet that if you ever get the opportunity to officiate at a state event, they'd tell you to knock that stuff off or don't come back. I believe one of the latest rule updates on the OWOA and OHSAA site said something about using only approved mechanics.

That's kinda why I brought this all up. I've done this for years and not one other Ref has said anything. I've Ref'd with Hall of Fame refs and very experienced guys.. I was actually surprised a little when I read that - must of cruised over it previously. Maybe I don't do it as much as I think to get "caught". I am the 1st to complain about it not being uniform across the state...BUT Ohio is doing a great job getting us all on the same page.
My lesson for the day, read my damn books!
- I still don't see the "coaching" part in these though.
We are taught to say - still neutral or I've got nothing - on a scramble. IMO, as long as an instruction is not directed at a particular wrestler...It's not coaching... It's informing them what I'm seeing...

Had an issue last night. We were under the impression that since we had state duals (which kids got scratch +3 on Wednesday) and we had a dual yesterday so our kids had scratch +4. We thought that since a HVY had to be at least 218 to wrestle at state duals, they would have to be 219 for the dual on Thursday. Our kid made that, our opponents kid weighed in under 219. Therefore, he would be too light to compete against our HVY. However, when it came time for the match, he walked out there. We went to the table to discuss this and were told they changed the rule on that "at a meeting the night before". So what is the rule for minimum weight on HVY and where are these secret nightly meetings and is there cake there?

I was under the impression that minimum weight was only subject to the growth allowance and not additional pounds. That's the way I read the rule. 217 is now the minimum regardless of it being plus three or plus four. That's my take. Who else?

I was under the impression that minimum weight was only subject to the growth allowance and not additional pounds. That's the way I read the rule. 217 is now the minimum regardless of it being plus three or plus four. That's my take. Who else?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You are correct according to what I have been told by all refs so far this year.

Had an issue last night. We were under the impression that since we had state duals (which kids got scratch +3 on Wednesday) and we had a dual yesterday so our kids had scratch +4. We thought that since a HVY had to be at least 218 to wrestle at state duals, they would have to be 219 for the dual on Thursday. Our kid made that, our opponents kid weighed in under 219. Therefore, he would be too light to compete against our HVY. However, when it came time for the match, he walked out there. We went to the table to discuss this and were told they changed the rule on that "at a meeting the night before". So what is the rule for minimum weight on HVY and where are these secret nightly meetings and is there cake there?

Min weight is 217. It was 217 for state duals it is 217 for every event after christmas. It is even 217 on the 2nd day of a 2 day tourney. It is only subject to the growth allowance, not the consecutive comp allowance.

I was under the impression that minimum weight was only subject to the growth allowance and not additional pounds. That's the way I read the rule. 217 is now the minimum regardless of it being plus three or plus four. That's my take. Who else?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That doesn't make sense to me. If 215 is min and it must be moved to 217 after Christmas due to the allowance, why wouldn't the bottom move if additional pounds are given? Why is 217 the requirement after allowance then?

I've always thought that if you move a class to whatever weight, then the bottom follows as well to keep the same distance between the top and bottom the same.

That doesn't make sense to me. If 215 is min and it must be moved to 217 after Christmas due to the allowance, why wouldn't the bottom move if additional pounds are given? Why is 217 the requirement after allowance then?

I've always thought that if you move a class to whatever weight, then the bottom follows as well to keep the same distance between the top and bottom the same.

That's how I interpret this. I have been told by head refs though the years that is the correct interpretation.